HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION' fSCANNED
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES ;I
PRELIMINARY SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION
Proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
May 19, 2017
a
PREPARED FOR:
Ryan Homes
2005 Vista Parkway, Suite 102
West Palm Beach, Florida 33411
h
li
PREPARED BY:
Universal Engineering Sciences, Inc.
820 Brevard Avenue
Rockledge, Florida 32955
(321) 638-0808
Consultants in: Geotechnical Engineering • Environmental Sciences • Construction Materials Testing - Threshold Inspection
Offices in: Orlando • Daytona Beach - Fort Myers - Gainesville • Jacksonville • Ocala - Palm Coast • Rockledge - Sarasota
Miami • Panama City • Pensacola • Fort Pierce - Tampa • West Palm Beach • Atlanta, GA • Tifton, GA
LOCATIONS:
NVER
Atlanta
� SAL . Daytona Beach
•_ Fort Myers
ENGINEERING' SC,IE�VC:ES _Fort Pierce
Consultants` In: Geotechnica[Engineering - Environmental Sciences J aiksonvill
_ = Geophysical Services • Construction Materials Testing Threshold Inspection Jacksonville
Miami
Building Inspection Plan Review: + Buiiding Code Administration Ocala
Orlando .(Headquarters)
`�. Palm Coast
Panama City
Ma 19 2017 Pensacola
y ° Rockledge:
an Homes ; Sarasota
50 Centre ark Boulevard, Suite 3401:.c Tampa
p West Palm Beach
:st'Palm Beach, Florida 33401 • Atlanta, GA.
Tifton, GA
ention: Mr. Michael DeBock
Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
Proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Oakland Lake Circle
Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Mr. DeBock:
iersal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal) has completed a preliminary subsurface
loration at the above referenced site in Fort Pierce, Saint _Lucie County, Florida. Our
loration was authorized by you and was conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No.
0.0417.00003. This exploration was performed in accordance with generally 'accepted soil
foundation engineering practices. No otherwarranty,' expressed or implied; is made.
following report presents the results of our field exploration with a geotechnical engineering
pretation of those results with respect to the project characteristics as provided to us. We
includedour estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels at the boring
:ions and general comments concerning anticipated soil support characteristics for typical
-Ise residential buildings.
!e appreciate the opportunity to have worked with you .on this project and look forward
)ntinued association. Please do not hesitate to cor
we may further assist you as your plans proceed.,
rely yours.,
ERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES;: INC.
ate of;AUthddidVCii:,No. 549
lse R. Benitez Jr., I.,(,
aff Engineer
Addressee
#1450465
820 Brevard •Avenue; Rockledge; Florida 32955 (321): 638-0808 Fax "(321:) 638-0978 1
wmv:.UniversalEngineering: com
to a
TABLE: OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ................ .:,...:......., .........................:
2 ) PROJECT DESCRIPTION .............. .:.::1
3 PURPOSE.... ......:.... ...... :. ........ . .... ........... __,_ --:1
4 SITE DESCRIPTION.... ..::: „ ,1
4.1 SOIL SURVEY ... 2
4.2 TOPOGRAPHY.............. .,;.,..: 2
5' 0 SCOPE OF SERVICES.......... ............ ................................................,2
....... .......
LIMITATIONS
.............: .. ....................:..............:................. ... :,:::.::3
7 0 FIELD METHODOLOGIES......:...................:......,.,,.:..:...,...,.,,;;.,....,,.....;:::.::;:.;::::::::::.:
7.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS.... .......:; -4
7.2 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS.......;;:=a
7.3 PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES .
8' LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES...................�.......:.:.....:.::::.....:....::.:.....: ,.,.,.::..,.,...rr4
8.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS.........
0 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY ...................:.:
9.1 PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS— ......... ...,.. +...r. ;..,.,. ,:,..., ,.......:�:; .......i.5
11.0 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS ................:.:
10.1 EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
_ .....;:r: .r ....... 6.
10.2 TYPICAL WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER
11 .0 LABORATORY RESULTS ........
:::.:::::.::. ,:,..,..,...
-_... ..... _.
11.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS............. „, ,1;,,,,, t ;7
1112.1 PROPOSED BUILDING AREAS..... _ 7
i 0 CLOSURE......:.:..............................:...:.:............................,., .. _ _ ...... _.
LIST OF TABLES
,ble I: Saint Lucie County Soil Survey Designated Soil Types . 2
ble II: Generalized Soil Profile ............................................ ,,, „;.;,5
lible III; Pavement Core Results. ;.g
i
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321)_ 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978.
I :www.UniversalEngineering.com j
FIGURES
Location Figure No. 1
APPENDICES
to Boring Appendix A
ig Logs ...... . Appendix A
EXHIBITS
ment ... Exhibit 1
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321),638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.U,-'- Engineeiing.Oom.-.'--.,--
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision
Dort Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
.0 INTRODUCTION
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
iiversal Engineering Sciences, Inc. (Universal)' .has completed a preliminary subsurface
ploration for the proposed Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision in Fort Pierce, Saint Lucie
runty, . Florida. Our exploration was authorized by Mr. Michael DeBock of Ryan Homes and
is conducted as outlined in Universal's Proposal No. 0330.0417.00003. This exploration was
rformed in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No
ier warranty, expressed or implied; is made.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
is Universal's understanding, based upon information provided by the client, that the proposed
roject will consist of a residential subdivision in Fort Pierce, Florida; currently envisioned as
hown in Figure No. 1. The proposed subdivision is intended to have seventy-three (73)
�sidential lots.
understand that the stormwater runoff from .impervious surfaces to be developed at this site
be collected within an existing retention basin located in the central sections of the project
note that our subsurface exploration was,prelimirrei in nature and conducted to acquire
subsurface information only. Once spbcified site configuration, building detail and
al and traffic loading information are available a final subsurface exploration should be
0 PURPOSE
purposes of this exploration were:
• to explore the subsurface conditions at general locations and depths as requested by the
client and
• to provide our estimates of the typical wet season high groundwater levels at the boring
locations and
• to provide general comments concerning the anticipated soil support characteristics for
typical low-rise residential construction.
SITE DESCRIPTION
subject site is located within Section 11, Township 34 South, Range 39 East in Saint Lucie
nty, Florida. More. specifically, the ,site is located on the northwest quadrant of Palomar
et Road and North Kings Highway, in Fort Pierce, Florida. At the time. of drilling, the site
station consisted of mostly grass, along with an existing paved circular road around the.
osed subdivision.
1 '
820 Brevard Avenue -i Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321)1638-0978.
www.UniversalEngineering.com
1
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0006
�Dort
Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
4.1 SOIL SURVEY
wo (2) soil types are mapped within the general project area according to the Saint Lucie
County Soil Survey (SLCSS), dated 1980. A brief description of these soils is provided in the
ollowing Table I.
TABLE
SLCSS DESIGNATED SOIL TYPES — -
-Soil Type
(Map Symbol)
Brief Description
.Soil material that has been dug up from several areas with different,
'Arents,. 0 to 5 percent slopes (4) ;
kinds of soil. It is used to fill up areas such as low sloughs, marshes,;
shallow depressions, and swamps,
Wabasso
Nearly level, poorly drained sandy soils in broad areas. in the,
sand (48)
flatwoods. _
'RI
.2 TOPOGRAPHY
ccording to information obtained from the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) Oslo, Florida
uadrangle map dated 1949, photo -revised 1970, ground surface elevation across the site area
(ipre-developmental) is approximately +20 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD).
.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES
4lhe services conducted by Universal during our preliminary subsurface exploration program are
II
as follows:
•"'� Drill seven (7) Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings within the project site area to a
depth of 10 feet below existing land surface (bls).
• Core through the existing pavement sections at four (4) locations with a diamond tipped core
I ' drill to ascertain the approximate thickness of the asphaltic surfacing and base course.
Perform Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) testing within the upper, portions of the
selected SPT boreholes to help further determine soil consistencies.
,V Secure samples of.representative soils encountered in the soil borings for review, laboratory
analysis and classification by a Geotechnical Engineer.
• Measure the existing site groundwater levels and provide an estimate of the typical wet
season high groundwater levels.
Conduct soil gradation tests on selected soil samples obtained in the field to help determine
their engineering properties.
• Assess the existing soil conditions with respect to the proposed construction.
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge,' Florida 32g55 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
'and Lake Estates Subdivision
Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
Preparing a geotechnical engineering report which documents the results of our preliminary
subsurface exploration and laboratory testing program with analysis and general comments.
LIMITATIONS
Base note that this report is based, on a preliminary subsurface exploration program with the
ope of services, general boring locations and depths as developed in conjunction with the
ant. The information submitted in this report is based on data obtained from the soil borings
rformed at the locations indicated.on the Boring Location Plan and from other information as
erenced. This report, has. not been prepared: to meet the full needs of design professionals,
ntractors, or any other parties, and any use of this report by them without the guidance of the
it and foundation engineer who prepared it constitutes improper usage which could lead to
-oneous assumptions, faulty conclusions, and other problems.
is report does not reflect any variations which - may occur across the site. The nature and
tent of such variations may not become evident until the course of future explorations or
tual construction. If variations then become evident, it will be necessary for re-evaluation of
recommendations in this report after performing on -site observations during the construction
riod and noting the characteristics of any variations. Deleterious soils were not encountered
any of our boring locations; however, we cannot completely preclude their presence across
entire property. Therefore, this report should not be used for estimating such items as ' cut
d fill quantities.
ur field exploration did not find unsuitable or unexpected materials at the time of occurrence.
)wever, borings for a typical geotechnical report are widely spaced and generally not sufficient
r reliably. detecting the presence of isolated, anomalous surface or subsurface conditions, or
liably estimating unsuitable or suitable material quantities. Accordingly, Universal does not
commend relying on our boring information to negate presence of anomalous materials or for
timation of material quantities unless our contracted services specifically include sufficient
,ploration for such purpose(s) and within the report we so state that the level of exploration
ovided.should be sufficient to detect such anomalous conditions or estimate such quantities.
ierefore, Universal will not be responsible for any extrapolation' or use of our data by others
!yond the purpose(s) for which it is applicable or intended.
users of this report are cautioned that there was no requirement for Universal to attempt to
ate any man =made buried objects or identify any other potentially hazardous conditions that
y exist at the site during the course of this exploration. Therefore no attempt- was made by
versal 'to. locate or identify such concerns. Universal cannot be responsible, for any buried
n-made objects or environmental hazards which may be subsequently encountered during
istruction that are not discussed within the text of this. report. We can, provide this service if
uested.
F ""t a further description of the scope and limitations of this report please review the document
al
ached within Exhibit .1 'Important Information About Your Geotechnical Engineering Report"
prepared by GBA/The Geoprofessional Business.Association.
3:
820'13revard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax,1(321) 638-0978
www. UniversalEngineering.com
�11'akland Lake Estates Subdivision
Prt Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
I7.0 FIELD METHODOLOGIES
.1 STANDARD PENETRATION TESTS
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052. 0000
Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
ie seven (7) SPT borings, designated B1 'through B7 on the attached Figure No. 1, were
;rformed in general accordance with the :procedures of ASTM D 158.6 (Standard Method for
anetration Test and Split -Barrel Sampling of Soils). The SPT drilling technique involves driving
standard split -barrel sampler into the soil by a 140 pound hammer, free falling 30 inches. The
imber_.of blows required to drive the sampler 1 foot, after an initial seating of 6 'inches, is
:signated the penetration resistance, or N-value, an index to soil strength and consistency.
ie soil samples recovered from the split -barrel sampler were visually inspected and classified
general accordance with the guidelines of ASTM D 2487 (Standard Classification of Soils for-
igineering Purposes [Unified Soil Classification System]).
SPT soil borings were performed with a CME 45 ATV mounted drilling rig. Universal located
test borings in the field by using the provided site plan and by plotting in the field with a
rmin GPS receiver. No survey control was provided on -site, and our boring locations should
considered only as accurate as implied by the methods of measurement used. The
)roximate boring locations. are shown on the attached Figure No. 1.
2 DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER TESTS
namic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) tests were performed within the upper portions of the
ected SPT boreholes to help further determine soils consistencies. The DCP tests were
rformed at 1 foot intervals in general accordance with the procedures developed by Professor
F. Sowers and Charles S., Hedges (ASCE, 1966). The basic procedure for the DCP test is as
ows: A. standard 1.5 inch diameter, conical point is driven into the soil by a 15-pound steel
,nmer falling 20 inches. Following the seating of the point to a depth of 2 inches, the number
blows required to drive the sampler an additional 1.75 inches is designated the penetration
;istance, providing an index to soil strength and density.
PAVEMENT CORE SAMPLES
iples of the existing asphaltic pavement sections were obtained at four ,(4) core locations
through C4) with a 4 inch nominal diameter diamond bitcore drill, advancing through the
ialtic pavement into the underlying base course materials. Afterwards the core holes were.
;filled and the surfacing patched with an asphaltic "cold patch" mixture and the core samples
'ned to our laboratory for.subsequent examination.
8.1,0 LABORATORY METHODOLOGIES
PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
WO completed- #200 sieve particle size analyses on seven (7) representative soil .samples.
T WO
samples were tested according to the procedures listed ASTM D 1140 (Standard Test
Mk�thod for Amount of Material in Soils Finer than the No. 200 Sieve). In part, ASTM D 1140
re11uires a thorough mixing the sample with water and flushing it through a No. 200 sieve until all
of a particles smaller than the sieve size leave.the sample.
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
I www.Universa[Engineering.com
,I �
and Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
e percentage of the material finer than the No. 200 sieve helps determines the textural nature
the soil sample :and aids .in evaluating its engineering characteristics. The percentage of
iterials passing the #200 sieve is shown on the attached boring logs.
0 SOIL STRATIGRAPHY
Nhe results of our field: exploration and laboratory analysis, together with pertinent information
btained from the SPT borings, such as soil profiles,, penetration resistance and stabilized
Iroundwater levels are shown on the boring logs included in Appendix A. The Key to Boring
ogs, Soil Classification Chart is also .included in Appendix A. The. soil profiles were prepared
fr;�om field logs after the recovered soil samples were examined by a Geotechnical Engineer.
stratification lines shown on the boring logs represent the approximate'boundaries between
types, and may.not depict exact subsurface soil conditions. The actual soil boundaries.may
more transitional than depicted. A generalized profile. of the soils encountered at our boring
ations is presented in the following Table II. For more detailed soil profiles, please refer to the
liched boring logs.
TABLE II
GENERALIZED SOIL PROFILE
Depth
ncountered
(feet, bIs)
Approximate
Thickness
(feet)
Soil -Description - i
r
Fill soils consisting of fine sands with varying quantities of silt, clay,'
Surface
2 to 9
gravel,. broken shell, and clay lumps [SP, SP-SM, SC]; loose to-1
medium dense.
Highly interla ered strata consisting of fine sands SP , fine sands'
il
with silt SP-SM , and clayey fine sands [SC], with varying
2 to 9
1+ to 8+
quantities of broken shell and occasional cemented rock layers;
loose to dense. At boring location B2, the fine sand with silt [SP- ;
r
SM] strata is partially cemented with iron oxide & organic salts and
which is locally known as hardpan.
I ] denotes Unified Soil Classification system designation. .
+ indicates strata encountered at boring termination, total thickness undetermined.
9.' PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
Th l results of our examination and measurement of the core samples taken in the field from the
exiisting pavement sections are shown in the following Table III:
V 820 Brelvard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321)'638-0801 Fax (321) 638-0978
p www.UniversalEngineering.com
gkland Lake Estates Subdivision
)rt Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida
Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
TABLE III
PAVEMENT CORE RESULTS
Approximate Thickness6Type. Approximate Thickness
Boring/Core of Asphaltic Surfacing of Base Course Type of Base Course f'
Location,Materials
(inches) (inches)
0.7 S3 - -- -
C1 1.0 S3 81/2 Coquina
n R G�q
� C2
IN
1.1 S3
1.1 S3
8/
ulna
Coquina
C3 1.0 S3 8 Coquina
1.6 S3
0.8 S3 — - --- - = - - -- -
C4 1.0 S1 10 Coquina
-- - - - 0-T S3 = -
1. See attached Figure No. 1 for approximate core locations. —
2. Classification of asphaltic layerings was performed visually and may not represent actual FDOT mix
parameters.
3. Subgrade soils consist mostly of fine sands with traces of gravel & broken shell [SP] (i.e. stabilized
subgrade).
GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
1 1 EXISTING GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS
We measured the water levels in the boreholes on May 8 2017 after the groundwater was
Y �
all�� wed to stabilize. The groundwater levels are shown on the attached boring logs. The
groundwater level depths ranged from 4.3 feet bls at boring location B6 to 5.7 feet bls at boring
!ovations B2 and B7. Fluctuations in groundwater levels should be anticipated throughout the
yeV�a� r, primarily due to seasonal variations in rainfall, surface runoff, and other factors that may
vat from the time the borings were conducted.
10� 2 TYPICAL WET SEASON HIGH GROUNDWATER LEVEL
Thlie typical wet season high groundwater level is defined as the highest groundwater level
su�talned for a period of 2 to 4 weeks during the "wet" season of the year, for existing site
co�ditions, in a year with average normal rainfall amounts. Based on historical data, the rainy
se son in Saint Lucie County, Florida is between June and October of the year. In order to
estimate the wet season water level at the boring locations, many factors are examined,
including the following:
I
a, Measured groundwater level
b. Drainage characteristics of existing soil types
C. Season of the year (wet/dry season)
d,. Current & historical rainfall data (recent and year-to-date)
e., Natural relief points (such as lakes, rivers, swamp areas, etc.)
' f. Man-made drainage systems (ditches, canals, etc.)
g. Distances to relief points and man-made drainage systems
6
820 Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalEngineering.com
i
Oakland Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.9700052.0000
Dort Pierce, Saint Lucle County, Florida Preliminary. Subsurface Exploration
0 h.. On -site types of vegetation
i. Area topography (ground surface elevations)
roundwater level readings were taken on. May 8, 2017. According to data from the Southeast
egional Climate Center and the National. Weather Service, the total rainfall in the previous
onth of April for Central Saint Lucie County was 2.2 inches, approximately at."the normal levels
r the month of April. Year-to=date rainfall for 2017 through May 8th was approximately 6Y2
ches, roughly 6 inches below the normal level for this time period.
1 on this information and factors listed above, we estimate that the typical wet season high
dwater levels at the boring locations will be approximately 2'/ feet above the existing
ured levels. Please note, however, that peak stage elevations .immediately following
is intense storm events, may be somewhat higher than the -estimated typical wet season
to the variable silt and clay content within the near surface soils at this site, we suspect that
may be occasional isolated pockets of "perched" groundwater throughout the project area,
cularly during periods of prolonged wet weather. These temporary perched water table
s may be higher than the estimated wet season high groundwater levels indicated above.
.0 LABORATORY RESULTS
.1 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS
soil samples submitted for analysis were classified as fine sands [SP]: The percentage of
sizes passing the #200 sieve size are shown on the boring logs at the approximate depth
.0 ANALYSIS AND GENERAL COMMENTS
.1 PROPOSED'BUILDING AREAS
e removal of site vegetation and roots, along with other construction activities- will further
sen surficial soils to various depths. To provide a homogeneous,-- compacted, sandy soil
;tem underneath the proposed foundations and floor- slabs for the proposed residences,
isification of at least the upper. 2;.feet of the existing surficial, loose soils and subsequent
litional fill soils will be necessary. This should.create a soil mat capable of -dissipating the
Iding loads over any remaining loose strata at depth.
believe that this can be effectively accomplished using conventional site preparation
icedures including a comprehensive root raking and stripping procedure to remove,
aetation, root mats, debris and organic topsoils; and then an extensive proof -rolling and
isification program for the surficial soils and subsequent structural fill. Assuming that such
cedures are properly performed, we anticipate that conventional, shallow spread footing
ndations may be used to support conventional .one to tuyo storya'resideiitial construction.
7
8k Brevard Avenue, Rockledge, Florida 32955 (321) 63 -0808 Fax (321) 638-0978
www.UniversalErigineering.com
and Lake Estates Subdivision Universal Project No. 0330.1700052.0000
Pierce, Saint Lucie County, Florida Preliminary Subsurface Exploration
3.0 CLOSURE
le appreciate this opportunity to be of service as your geotechnical consultant on this'phase of
ie project and look forward to providing follow up explorations and geotechnical engineering
nalyses as the project progresses through the design phase. If you have any questions
:)ncerning this report or when we may be of any further service, please contact us.
8 I
820 Brevard Avenue, RoAledge, Florida 32055 (321) 638-0808 Fax (321.) 638-096
www.UniversalEngineeri.ng.com
IVERSAL
EERING SCIENCES
® Approximate SPT Boring Location
Note: Figure is based upon a Google Earth
aerial Photograph.
OAKLAND ESTATES SUBDIVISION
HUMMINGBIRD WAY
FORT PIERCE, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BORING LOCATION PLAN
4WN BY: CEI ,DATE --May 16„ 2017 CHECKED BY: ,QR DATE: may 1 ¢, 2017
PROJECT NO, .
iLE: R2P0RTN0: PAGE NO:
1' = 200' 0330.1Z00052:0000 _ _- Ram Nw l
APPENDIX A
;'UNIVERSAL E.QIIEE ING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.: 0330.1700052,0000
BORING LOG REPORT NO.:
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
BORING DESIGNATION: 81
SHEET:
7 Of 1
Hummingbird Way
SECTION: TOWNSHIP:
SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
Fort Pierce, Florida
G.S-ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:
514117
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
WATER TABLE (ft): 4.6
DATE FINISHED:
514117
DATE OF READING: 518/2017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T. (ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
WPER
II
w
�
DESCRIPTION
zoo
MC
(INJ
COONTr.
a
I INCREMENT
z
w
a
1%)
• I%)
HR.)
I%)
L+.r
fine SAND with traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP]
},
4.1
7.4
5fine
- -- - --- - -- ----
SAND with gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps (Fill), --
,tf
brown,[SP]
27
10.6
•i
I
clayey fine SAND with traces of broken -shell (Fill), "brown, [SC]
_
I
I
11
7-7-4
l
,IG r
clayey fine SAND-wlth traces oorganis, ark brown, [SC] - -
acf cd
24
i
I
i
I
i
I
it
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
I ,
,
I
15:
I
A
I
I
I'
I'
I
0330.1700052.0000
UNPROJECT NO.: IVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES REPORT NO.:,
BORING LOG - -
APPENDIXA
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B2
SHEET:
1 Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP:
SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:
614117
WATER TABLE (ft): 51
DATE FINISHED:
5W17
DATE OF READING: 6/8/2017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S.W.T- (ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
a
BLOWS !
PER 6"
J
~
0
a
DESCRIPTION
-200
MC
C
K
ORG.
c
¢
INCREMENT.
r'
�+ g
��)
�
QNJ
CONT.
2
w
p
HR.)
M)
,•
fine SAND with -traces of clay lumps -(Fill), brown, [SP]-
.ti
3;0
5.0
III
5$16
6-
5 22-26
22''
.� 2fine
SAND. grey. [SP]-
17-R
R
J:
•t.•
5
fine SAND with silt, dark brown, (hardpan) [SP-SM]
6-6-6
12
I
clayey fine SAND, brown, [SC] -
6-7-8
15
6-4-4
8
,
clayey fine SAND with occasional cemented rock layers, grey,
[SC]
—
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
i
CONE PENETROMETER.
15
----- __
a ---
I
i
- -- --- -
C
c
CLIENT:
LOCATIC
UN.IVE:RSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES REPORT
PROJECT NO.: 0330.1700052.0000
BORING LOG REPORT NO. —
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B3
SHEET:
I Of I
SECTION: TOWNSHIP:
SOUTH RANGE:
EAST
G.S., ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED:
6/4117
WATER TABLE (ft): 5.3
DATE FINISHED:,
514117
DATE OF READING: 518/2017
DRILLED BY:
TM, RP, MC
EST, W.S:W.T. (ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
Ca'
BLOWS
j
H
pm
9
J
K
ORG.
PER
X.
DESCRIPTION
200
MC
(INJ
CONT, '
o
Imo¢
f
INCREMENT
Z
a�
3 S
o
vi
l�ui
HR.)
l%)
fine SAND with silt and traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown,
[SP-SM]
I
9-23-28
23•
<'
5-18-20
18";
•'f' `'..
Fne SAND,-d"ark tirbwn SP
II
5-6-7
4.5
18,3
_'fine SAND with silt, brown, [SPSM] - -
j'
�II
6-7-9
16
r a
�
..fine SAND, grey, [SP] - - -
dl 5-7-8
15
:3:�
3.9
19.5
sy,•Y
7-6-4
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
I
DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
it
'I
4
15
--
III
In
a -----
I
- -
-.
I
.. ...........
C
''2
+7
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.:__•0330.1T00052.0000
BORING LOG REPORT NO.:
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE SCRING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B4 SHEET: 1 Of 1
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G,S,' ELEVATION (ft):
WATER TABLE (ft): 5.1
DATE OF READING: 618/2017
EST. W.S.W.T. (ft):
DATE STARTED: 514117
DATE FINISHED: SW17
DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
=
L BLOWS
j
.,
OJ
zoo
MC
K
1 ORG.
w v
PER8" I
¢
w 0
DESCRIPTION
I)
(IN
(INJ
CONT.;,
o
I,Ill!
y :INCREMENT
-_- --
Z
--•.
W
v
- ---- - � °-_-` =- - .--
'
! HR.)
(%)
_
_
fine SAND with silt, gravel; broken shell, —and clay lumps (Fill),-
r
{t.
brown, [SP-SM]
S.
3-18-29
18'
t;
I'}
11-21-25
21•";
3� ,
3-23-30 i
23'
-
��� -�
• �� �
• •
-fine SAND with:silt, dark brown, jSP-SM] -
111
B-12-14
2fi
i C:
r1r:
i
:Ys
.
'1 14-12-15
27
'`•''
"
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
fine SAND with silt and broken shell, brown, [SP-SM]
14-15-16
32
14-12-10
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
I
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
i
15
'1
low.,
UNIVERSAL :ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT"°.:. 033°_"°°052.°°°°-
BORING LOG REPORT NO.:
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: BJ SHEET: 9 Of 9
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 514117
WATER TABLE (ft): 4.6 DATE FINISHED: 5/4117
DATE OF READING: 5/8/2017 DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W.S;W.T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
i_
BLOWS
Lu
¢
'' ~
al
K
--
g.
PER 6"
f
w
a
DESCRIPTION
-200
MC
pNr
O
CNTNT•
o —
a
w
ILI
INCREMENT
>
Z
>-
3
h)
(�)
HR.)
(Y)
•.::
fine SAND with traces of gravel, broken shell, and clay lumps
-
-
- - -
—
(Fill); brown, [SP]
. ,
3A
2,4
A.
I
2-R
R—
l•frr'.
.�
l
8-R
R" i
f N.
I
'.j
a
2-21-R
21•
•
•
•III
• .,,.•
`+••i ••, '•
..
_
,..
_
20-20-18
38
find -SAND with silt and traces of broken shell,, gray, [SP-SM]
i Sr•
10-9-6
15
+ry
BORING TERMINATED AT-,1p'_
I
.
,* DYNAMIC'COWPENETROMETER,(DCP) VALUES
R_=DENOTES,REFUSALTO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
i
.CONE PENETROMETER. -
I
I
d �
1
I
I,
i
it
UNIVERSAL- ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.-- 0330.1700052-0000
BORING LOG REPORT NO.;.
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: BG SHEET: 1 of 1
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft):
DATE STARTED: 614117
WATER TABLE (ft): 4.3
DATE FINISHED: 514117
DATE OF READING: 518/2017
DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W:S.W.T. (ft):
TYPE OF SAMPLING:
i
BLOWSUj
O
�i
K
ORG.
w
Pegs"
>
3
3 S,
DESCRIPTION
���
lyi
(IN.1
CONT.
c
INCREMENT
=
H
c
HR.) ;
I%)
('
fine -SAND -with —silt hifd traces of clay lumps (Fill), brown,
[SP-SM]
d
R
R
17-20-25
20'
i
-
fine SAND, grey [SP]
_
6-7-7
14
clayey fine SAND, grey, [SC]
I -
4-8-6
14
a
6-6-6
12
f
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
" DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
III
�
CONE PENETROMETER.
i
1
0330.1700052.0000
UNIVERSAL ENGINEERING SCIENCES PROJECT NO.: _
BORING LOG REPORTNO.: -- - _ - -
APPENDIX: A
Oakland Estates Subdivision
Hummingbird Way
Fort Pierce, Florida
SEE BORING LOCATION PLAN
BORING DESIGNATION: B% SHEET: 1 Of i
SECTION: TOWNSHIP: SOUTH RANGE: EAST
G.S. ELEVATION (ft): DATE STARTED: 5/4117
WATER TABLE (ft): 5.7 DATE FINISHED: 514/17
DATE OF READING: 5/8/2017 DRILLED BY: TM, RP, MC
EST. W;S:W;T. (ft): TYPE OF SAMPLING:
m
if
o
etaws
PER6'
PER
m
a
In
Eu
DESCRIPTION
zao
, MC
coNr,,
0
4
INCREMENT
Z i.
y
3 0
(%)
(%)
HR.) j
I%)
fine SAND With silt and clay lumps (Fill), brown, [SP SM]
—
•
III
hI
21-R
R*'.:
•-r'
•1 ••
t
2.
�
fine SAND, grey, [SPl - — — - - —
10-24-26
24*
,``.`•
1.6
3,4
14-R
R"''�'
•r..c
5...........
{apt
7-7-7
14
clayey tine SAND, grey, [SC]
i I
i
V
5-5-5
ill
10
i
j
I
i
i
{
BORING TERMINATED AT 10'
* DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUES
R - DENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION WITH DYNAMIC
-
I
I
{
I
i
CONE PENETROMETER.
I
I
I
15I:
I
�
KEY TO B.ORING !LOGS
SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART*
I
I. Sand or Gravel [SP SW GP GW] - -
{ Sand or Gravel with Silt
UNIVERSAL-
p or Clay[SPSM,SPSC> !12 ENO;INEERING
SCIENCES, INC.
Silty or Clayey' :Sand
or Gravel[SM,SC,GM,GC]
Sandyy or Greyetly Silt;or'.CIa`y,
[ML,CL-ML,QL';M ,CHpL;O
70 _
I
85
,; Sllt`or Cla with Sand orGravel',
T
�! Silt or. lay..
[M ,CL4ML,CL,MH.CH,OL,OHI
100
60
50
1tJ0 I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 90 90- 100�
LIQUID LIMIT
PLASTICITY CHART I'
GROUP NAME AND SYMBOL
COARSE GRAINED SOILS
FINE GRAINED SOILS
HIGHLY
ORGANIC SOILS fI
WELL -GRADED
SANDS ISM
o'er
WELL -GRADED
GRAVELS G
I WI
INORGANIC SILTS SLIGHT PLASTICITY
ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS
LOW PLASTICITY
I
[OL]•'
POORLY -GRADED
SANDS [SP]
Qo
<
POORLY -GRADED
GRAVELS [GP]
INORGANIC SILTY CLAY
LOW PLASTICITY
ORGANIC SILTSICLAYS
MEDIUM TO HIGH
[CL-ML]
i
PLASTICITY [OH]"
POORLY -GRADED
POORLY -GRADED
INORGANIC CLAYS
�= "� : `
PEAT, HUMUS, SWAMP SOILS
SANDS WITH.SICT
° '"
GRAVELS WITH SILT'
®.
LOW TO MEDIUM
r;: r, ��
WITH HIGH ORGANIC
[SP-SM]
[GP -GM]
PLASTICITY[CL]
CONTENTS[PT]..
I
POORLY GRADED
SANDS WITH CLAY
-
°',=
_
POORLY -GRADED
GRAVELS WITH CLAY
INORGANIC SILTS HIGH
PLASTICITY[MH]
[SP-SC]
p,,+.'
[GP-GC]
,�.
RELATIVE DENSITY
SILTY SANDS
IS
a o
SILTY GRAVELS
[GM]
I
INORGANIC CLAYS HIGH
PLASTICITY[CH]
(SAND AND GRAVEL) I'
.'
VERY
LOOSE - 0 to 4 Blows/ft.
LOOSE - 5 to 10 Blowsift.
MEDIUM DENSE -11 to 30 Slowslft.
CLAYEY SANDS
CLAYEY GRAVELS
DENSE -31 to 50 Blows/ft.
[SC]
[GC]
VERY DENSE - more than 60 Blowsfft. !
IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D 2487- UNIFIED SOIL
I
SILTY CLAYEY SANDS
'CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM.
CONSISTENCY
[SCSM]
(SILT AND CLAY)
" LOCALLY MAY BE KNOWN AS MUCK.
8',"ENOTES DYNAMIC CONE PENETROMETER (DCP) VALUE
R -, ENOTES REFUSAL TO PENETRATION
P -IOENOTES PENETRATION WITH ONLY WEIGHT OF DRIVE HAMMER
NIE� IDENOTES GROUNDWATER TABLE NOT ENCOUNTERED
ITEM DUAL SYMBOLS,ARE USED TO INDICATE BORI]
VERY SOFT- 0 to 2 Blowalft
SOFT - 3 to 4 Blowsift.
FIRM - 5 to 8 Blowsift.
STIFF - 9 to 18 Blowslft.
VERY STIFF -17 to 30'.13lowslfL I.
HARD - more than 30 Blows/ft.
APPENDIX A.1
u,
EXH}BIT 1
0
The
-has
a cll
geo
as F
a lo'
j that
con
disc
Info
con
Acti
Ass
I wide
be c
p— 6�tc�hgca1-EiReport --
ioprofessional Business Association:(GBA)
:pared this advisory to help. you —'assumedly
t"representative — interpret and apply this
hnical=engineering report as effectively'
sible. In that way; clients can benefit from
,ed exposure 4o the subsurface problems
r decades, have been a principal .cause of
action'delays, cost overruns, claims, and
.s. If you have questions or want more .
Won about any: of the issues discussed below;
tyour GBA-member geotechnical engineer.
Involvement In the Geoprofessional Business
ation exposes geotechnical engineers to a.
-ray. of risk -confrontation techniques that can
enuine benefit for everyone involved with a
action project.
Geotochnical-Engineering Services.Are Performed for
Specfic Purposes, Persons, and Projects
Geotec nical engineers structure their services to meet the specific
needs their clients. A geotechnical-engineering.study conducted
for a giI,,en civil engineer will not likely meet the needs of a civil-
worksonstructor.or even a different civil engineer. Because each
geote nical-engineering study is unique, each geotechnical-
engme ring report is unique, prepared solely for the client. Those who
rely on geotechnical-engineering report prepared for a different client
can be riously misled. No one except authorized client representatives
should' lely on this geotechnical-engineering report without first
conferri g with the geotechnical engineer who prepared it. And no one
= note n you —should apply this report for any purpose or project except
the one, originally contemplated.
Readithis Report in Full
costly �oblems have occurred because those relying on a geotechnical-
engine mg report did not read it in its entirety. Do not rely on an
executi' a summary. Do not read selected elements only. Read this report
in full.
You N, ed to inform Your Geotechnical Engineer
Your geotechnical engineer considered unique, project -specific factors
when d igning the study behind this report and developing the
confirm tion-dependent recommendations the report conveys. A few
typical tors include:
• the ' lienfs goals, objectives, budget, schedule, and
risk anagement preferences;
• thel eneral nature of the structure involved, its size,
con guration, and performance criteria;
• the structures location and orientation on the site; and
• oth' I� planned or existing site improvements, such as
reta ning;walls, access roads, parking lots, and
ut�d ound utilities.
Typical changes that could erode the reliability of this report include.
those that affect -
the site's size or shape,
• the function of the proposed structure, as when ifs
changed from a parking garage to an office building, or
from a light -industrial plant to -a. refrigerated warehouse;
• the elevation, configuration, location, orientation, or
weight of the proposed structure;
• the composition of the design team; or
• project ownership.
As a general rule, always.inform your geotechnical engineer of project
changes — even minor ones — and request an assessment of their
impact. The geotechnical engineer who prepared this report cannot accept
responsibility or liability for problems that arise because the geotechnical
engineer was not informed about developments the engineer otherwise
would have considered.
This Report May Not Be Reliable
Do not rely on this report if your geotechnical engineer prepared it:
• for a different client;
• for a different project;
• for a different site (that may or may not include all or a
portion of the original site); or
• before important events occurred at the site or adjacent
to it; e.g., man-made events like construction or,
environmental remediation, or natural events like floods,
droughts, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations.
Note, too, that it could be unwise to rely on a geotechnical-engineering
report whose reliability may have been affected by the passage of time,
because of factors like changed subsurface conditions; new or modified
codes, standards, or regulations; or new techniques or tools. if your
geotechnical engineer has not indicated an "apply -by" date on the report,
ask what it should be, and, in general, if you are the least bit uncertain
about the continued reliability of this report, contact your geotechnical
engineer before applying it. A minor amount of additional testing or
analysis — if any is required at all — could prevent major problems.
Most of the "Findings" Related in' -this Report Are
Professional Opinions
Before construction begins, geotechnical engineers explore a sites
subsurface through various sampling and testing procedures.
Geotechnical engineers can observe actual subsurface conditions only at
those specific locations where sampling and testing were performed. The
data derived from that sampling and testing were reviewed by your
geotechnical engineer, who then applied professional judgment to
form opinions about subsurface conditions throughout the site. Actual
sitewide-subsurface conditions may differ - maybe significantly — from
those indicated in this report. Confront that risk by retaining your
geotechnical engineer to serve on the -design team from project start to
project finish, so the individual can provide informed guidance quickly,
wheneve� needed.
f - ThisIlReport's Recommendations Are
The rq commendations included in this report — including any options
or alternatives — are confirmation -dependent. In other words, they are
not fi 'al, because the geotechnical engineer who developed them relied
heavil' on judgment and opinion to do so. Your geotechnical engineer
1 can fi alize the recommendations only after observing actual subsurface
condiiFons revealed during construction. If through observation your
geotecEI ical engineer confirms that the conditions assumed to exist
actual y do exist, the recommendations can be relied upon, assuming
no o °er changes have occurred. The geotechnical engineer who prepared
this re ° ort cannot assume responsibility or liability for conftrmation-
depenilent recommendations if you fail to retain that engineer to perform
const4ction observation.
This Report Could Be Misinterpreted
Otheriidesign professionals' misinterpretation of geotechnical-
engineering reports has resulted in costly problems. Confront that risk
by hav�ing your geotechnical engineer serve as a full-time member of the
desiQnGlteam, to:
c nfer with other design -team members,
h iip develop specifications,
re °1iew pertinent elements of other design professionals'
pi 1 s and specifications, and
• b4lon hand quickly whenever geotechnical-engineering
guidance is needed.
You sh uld also confront the risk of constructors misinterpreting this
report.,Do so by retaining your geotechnical engineer to participate in
prebid and preconstruction conferences and to perform construction
Give �' , onstructors a Complete Report and Guidance
Some o1wners and design professionals mistakenly believe they can shift
unanti ipated-subsurface-conditions liability to constructors by limiting
the information they provide for bid preparation. To help prevent
the cosy, contentious problems this practice has caused, include the
comple a geotechnical-engineering report, along with any attachments
or appendices, with your contract documents, but be certain to note
conspfc p1ously that you've included the material for informational
purpos only. To avoid misunderstanding, you may also want to note
that "informational purposes" means constructors have no right to rely
on the I��terpretations, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations in
the repert, but they may rely on the factual data relative to the specific
times, l cations, and depths/elevations referenced. Be certain that
constr+ors know they may learn about specific project requirements,
includi g options selected from the report, only from the design
drawin�s and specifications. Remind constructors that they may
perform their own studies if they want to, and be surd to allow enough
time to permit them to do so. Only then might you be in a position
to give constructors the information available to you, while requiring
them to at least share some of the financial responsibilities stemming
from unanticipated conditions. Conducting prebid and preconstruction
conferences can also be valuable in this respect.
Read Responsibility Provisions Closely
Some client representatives, design professionals, and constructors do
not realize that geotechnical engineering is far less exact than other
engineering disciplines. That lack of understanding has nurtured
unrealistic expectations that have resulted in disappointments, delays,
cost overruns, claims, and disputes. To confront that risk, geotechnical
engineers commonly include explanatory provisions in their reports.
Sometimes labeled "limitations, many of these provisions indicate
where geotechnical engineers' responsibilities begin and end, to help
others recognize their own responsibilities and risks. Read these
provisions closely. Ask questions. Your geotechnical engineer should
respond fully and frankly.
Geoenvironmental Concerns Are Not Covered
The personnel, equipment, and techniques used to perform an
environmental study — e.g., a "phase -one" or "phase-twd' environmental
site assessment — differ significantly from those used to perform
a geotechnical-engineering study. For that reason, a geotechnical-
engineering report does not usually relate any environmental findings,
conclusions, or recommendations; e.g., about the likelihood of
encountering underground storage tanks or regulated contaminants.
Unanticipated subsurface environmental problems have led to project
failures. If you have not yet obtained your own environmental
information, ask your geotechnical consultant for risk -management
guidance. As a general rule, do not rely on an environmental report
prepared for a different client, site, or project, or that is more than six
months old.
Obtain Professional Assistance to Deal with Moisture
Infiltration and Mold
While your geotechnical engineer may have addressed groundwater,
water infiltration, or similar issues in this report, none of the engineer's
services were designed, conducted, or intended to prevent uncontrolled
migration of moisture — including water vapor — from the soil through
building slabs and walls and into the building interior, where it can
cause mold growth and material -performance deficiencies. Accordingly,
proper implementation of thegeotechnical engineer's recommendations
will not of itself be sufficient to prevent moisture infiltration. Confront
the risk of moisture infiltration by including building -envelope or mold
specialists on the design team. Geotechnical engineers are not building -
envelope or mold specialists.
GEOPROFESSIONAL
BUSINESS
.� ASSOCIATION
Telephone: 3011565-2733
e-mail: info@geoprofessional.org www.geoprofessional.org
Cop ght 2016 by Geoprofessional Business Association (GBA). Duplication, reproduction, or copying of this document, in whole or in part, by any means whatsoever, is strictly
pro
hibitej�except with GBAs specific written permission. Excerpting, quoting, or otherwise extracting wording from this document is permitted only with the express written permission
of GBA, and only for purposes of scholarly research or book review. Only members of GBA may use this document or its wording as a complement to or as an element of a report ofany
kind, Any other firm, individual, or other entity that so uses this document without being a GBA member could be committing negligent